Why is this the case? Gore supports many popular positions, such
as preserving Social Security and supporting gun control. A Gallup poll shows that he has a 56 percent favorable rating from the public. He is universally agreed as being a thoughtful, intelligent candidate.
However, Gore's problems are not from personal flaws or unpopular ideas; it is instead a matter of perception-a perception shaped by a media that seemingly focuses on every Gore deficiency (and conversely
focuses on every Bush virtue). As a result of this relentlessly negative coverage, Gore suffers in public opinion polls.Ever since Gore began his campaign for the presidency, the media has focused on
alleged misstatements, his personality and, of course, scandals. In each case, the coverage is negative, overblown and exaggerated.
For example there was much derision aimed at Gore over the
Love Canal story. The press claimed Gore stated he was the first congressman to discover chemical contamination at Love Canal, that he "started it all". But in the April 2000 issue of the Washington Monthly,
Robert Parry points out the media followed the lead of GOP press releases in distorting what Gore actually said. Gore never claimed to been the first to discover Love Canal, but instead mentioned an incident
in Tennessee that was similar to Love Canal. Gore was referring to this incident as having started his interest in toxic waste issues, as having "started it all," which is saying something different
entirely. This is the type of distortion that has happened to Gore throughout the campaign.
Also, much attention has been given to Gore's personality. Countless articles have been devoted to how wooden
and calculating Gore is and how that hurts his appeal to voters. In this area, he is compared unfavorably with Bush, who is viewed as gregarious and outgoing.
The question that has to be asked about the
focus on Gore's personality is since when does personality decide who should be president? Warren Harding had a pleasant personality but turned out to be one of the worst presidents; Woodrow Wilson was
considered more cerebral and calculating that Gore ever will be and he is consistently ranked among the ten greatest presidents. By focusing so much on personality, though, the media makes people believe
that is the main quality voters should look for in a president.
Finally, the mainstream media has had an obsession with trying to pin any type of scandal to Gore. Recently, much was made about the tenant
who called Gore a "slumlord" for failing to make repairs on the house she was renting from him. Gore immediately agreed to make the repairs, but press coverage made it seem worse than it actually was.
Gore's failure to catch fire in the polls is the end result of all this slanted coverage. By contrast, anything Bush does is seen in a positive light. During the GOP primaries, Bush shifted his campaign
strategy from "compassionate conservative" to "reformer with results" and was instantly hailed as being politically savvy. Gore could do the same and be branded desperate or floundering. Bush floats
proposals on such topics as social security, environmental policy and missile defense; despite all of them being warmed-over Reaganism his views are seen as bold and daring. Gore proposes changes in health
care and trade policy and is seen as timid and pandering.
Potential Bush scandals are downplayed by the mainstream media as well. Despite the reporting on some the Bush scandals by Molly Ivins and the
Center for Public Integrity, the beltway pundits give minimal coverage and instead focus on Gore and his association with a "scandal-ridden" administration.
As a result of such uneven coverage, is it any
wonder why Gore is struggling in the eyes of the public?
